Deng M C, Weyand M, Hammel D, Schmid C, Kerber S, Schmidt C, Breithardt G, Scheld H H
Muenster University Hospital, the Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Germany.
J Heart Lung Transplant. 1998 Aug;17(8):817-25.
Because the number of patients on the waiting list for transplantation is increasing and the stagnation in the number of organs donated has led to a more restrictive listing for transplantation, an increased fraction of patients needs to be bridged mechanically. We examined the hypothesis that selection of these patients with regard to urgency status is critical in determining outcome.
A cohort of 631 patients referred for transplantation to our center between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 1996, was analyzed. Two hundred ninety-seven patients were listed for transplantation and 157 were given transplantation. Forty-one patients had to undergo ventricular assist device implantation (n=34, Novacor; n=6, TCI Heartmate; n=1, Medos), 39 for bridging to transplantation and 2 for permanent support. Initial transplantation evaluation data were analyzed in 3 subgroups (elective bridging, urgent bridging, emergency bridging) and compared with another and with other patients referred for transplantation, specifically those who did not have to be bridged on the waiting list.
Patients who underwent elective or urgent assist device bridging were younger and more compromised than the rest of patients accepted on the waiting list (higher functional class, lower mean arterial pressure, lower cardiac index, lower serum sodium, higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressure). In the elective group, overall survival including perioperative mortality rate was better than in the urgent/emergency group and at least as good as in patients who were stable on the waiting list and did not undergo heart transplantation during follow-up. This should prompt cardiologists and cardiac surgeons to consider assist device implantation earlier.
